See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/275247875

Leadership style of sustainability professionals in the UK construction

industry

Article  in  Built Environment Project and Asset Management · May 2015

DOI: 10.1108/BEPAM-12-2013-0075

CITATIONS READS

15 9,413

3 authors:

Alex Opoku Vian Ahmed

University College London University of Salford
58 PUBLICATIONS   230 CITATIONS    77 PUBLICATIONS   498 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Heather Cruickshank
University of Cambridge
48 PUBLICATIONS   806 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Energy and Low-Income Tropical Housing (ELITH) View project

Lean construction View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Alex Opoku on 01 May 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Built Environment Project and Asset Management
Leadership style of sustainability professionals in the UK construction industry
Alex Opoku Vian Ahmed Heather Cruickshank
Article information:
To cite this document:
Alex Opoku Vian Ahmed Heather Cruickshank , (2015),"Leadership style of sustainability
professionals in the UK construction industry", Built Environment Project and Asset Management, Vol.
5 Iss 2 pp. 184 - 201
Permanent link to this document:
Downloaded by LONDON SOUTH BANK UNIVERSITY At 09:13 01 May 2015 (PT)

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/BEPAM-12-2013-0075
Downloaded on: 01 May 2015, At: 09:13 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 67 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 27 times since 2015*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Alex Opoku, Heather Cruickshank, Vian Ahmed, (2015),"Organizational leadership role in the delivery
of sustainable construction projects in UK", Built Environment Project and Asset Management, Vol. 5
Iss 2 pp. 154-169 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/BEPAM-12-2013-0074
Sepani Senaratne, Prasanna Rajitha Hewamanage, (2015),"The role of team leadership in achieving
LEED certification in a green building project", Built Environment Project and Asset Management, Vol.
5 Iss 2 pp. 170-183 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/BEPAM-09-2013-0036

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 273538 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of

download.
 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/2044-124X.htm

BEPAM
5,2
Leadership style of sustainability
professionals in the UK
construction industry
184 Alex Opoku
Received 15 December 2013
Department of Built Environment, London South Bank University,
Revised 3 April 2014 London, UK
Accepted 29 May 2014
Vian Ahmed
Downloaded by LONDON SOUTH BANK UNIVERSITY At 09:13 01 May 2015 (PT)

School of Built Environment, University of Salford, Salford,

Manchester, UK, and
Heather Cruickshank
Centre for Sustainable Development, University of Cambridge,
Cambridge, UK

Abstract
Purpose – Leadership is a significant success factor in promoting sustainability practices in the
construction industry. Sustainability is an integral part of the construction industry and affects all
aspects of construction business operations. The purpose of this paper is to investigate if there is any
particular leadership style associated with intra-organizational leaders within UK construction
organizations charged with the promotion of sustainability practices. The paper therefore examines
the effective leadership style of sustainability professionals responsible for developing sustainable
construction strategies.
Design/methodology/approach – Qualitative data were collected through semi-structured
interview with 15 leaders, followed by an industry-wide survey of 200 intra-organizational leaders
in contractor and consultant organizations in the UK construction industry.
Findings – The results showed that while there is no one best leadership style for all situation,
most leaders charged with the role of promoting sustainable construction are strategic in their style
or behaviour.
Originality/value – Although leadership and sustainability has been widely covered as separate
issues, little rigorous research has been done on the link between leadership and sustainability
in construction management research. The findings could guide organizational leaders with the
responsibility of promoting sustainability practices.
Keywords UK, Leadership style, Sustainability, Leadership, Construction organizations
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
Leadership is vital in the construction industry and a key success factor in the drive
towards sustainability (Ofori and Toor, 2008). Construction organizations need
leadership that provide the collective vision, strategy and direction towards society’s
common goal of a sustainable future. Organizational leaders should embed
sustainability approaches in their organizational activities and make sustainable
development part of their overall business strategy. The role of leadership in improving
the performance and innovation in the construction industry has been receiving
Built Environment Project and
Asset Management increasing attention in recent times (Bossink, 2007). However, less attention has been
Vol. 5 No. 2, 2015
pp. 184-201
given to the capability of intra-organizational leadership in promoting construction
© Emerald Group Publishing Limited
2044-124X
organizations towards the delivery of sustainable construction projects. The issue of
DOI 10.1108/BEPAM-12-2013-0075 sustainability is growing ever more important and the construction industry has the
 greatest impact on it than any other industrial sector, because the construction UK
industry provides benefits to the society as well as causing negative impacts; making construction
it a key sector in the fight for sustainable development (Sev, 2009).
The construction industry is a very important sector in achieving society’s sustainable
industry
development goals; however, the change towards the adoption of sustainability practices
is a process that presents a leadership challenge. Both Egan (1998) and Latham (1994)
called on leaders to lead the quest for change in the construction industry. Leaders have 185
an important role in guiding construction organizations towards sustainable practices and
it is believed that such leaders require unique leadership styles. Leadership style is all
about how people interact with those they seek to lead (Groetsch and Davis, 2006).
However, Toor and Ofori (2008) believe that leadership is also about authenticity and not
Downloaded by LONDON SOUTH BANK UNIVERSITY At 09:13 01 May 2015 (PT)

style. There has not been any evidence to show that one particular leadership style is the
best (Vecchio, 2002; Giritli and Oraz, 2004). However, Bossink (2007), argue that strategic,
charismatic, instrumental and interactive leadership styles influence an organization’s
innovativeness towards sustainability.
This paper therefore investigates the leadership style of intra-organizational leaders
within UK construction organizations charged with the promotion of sustainability
practices. The first part of the paper reviews relevant literature on leadership and the
construction industry. The second part of the paper presents the research approach
adopted for this study and the final part of the paper concludes with the analysis
of findings from the interviews and survey.

2. Defining leadership and sustainability practices

According to Doh (2002), leadership is an executive position in an organization and that
it is a process that has influence on others. However, Munshi et al. (2005) argue that
leaders are essential at all levels of organization and can emerge at different levels
within an organization (Newton, 2009). Leadership can be practiced by any individual
at different levels within an organization (Riches, 1997) regardless of the position
of hierarchy of that individual in the organization (Bass and Riggio, 2006). Leadership
is also said to be concerned with the ability of an individual to influence the behaviour
of others in order to deal with the desires of the leader (Fellows et al., 2003). Ferdig
(2007) describe leaders as those who inspire a shared vision, build consensus, provide
direction and foster changes in beliefs and actions among followers needed to achieve
the goals of an organization. Northouse (2010, p. 3), however, define leadership as:
A process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal.
From the definition of leadership above, anyone in an organization could potentially be
a leader at some point in time if they are involved in a process of influence that involves
encouraging and influencing sustainable practices (Taylor, 2008). Intra-organizational
leadership sought to influence other individuals (subordinates, superiors, peers) within
their organizations to achieve specific projects aim and objectives (Gattiker and Carter,
2010). This paper therefore defines leadership as: A process of influencing a group
of individuals to accomplish a common goal and not necessary an executive position.
It is therefore important to note that, all respondents who took part in this study are
individuals who are in a position of organizational influence. These sustainability
professionals are leading their respective construction organizations towards
a common goal of achieving sustainability. The study therefore described them as
leaders following Northouse’s (2010) definition of leadership quoted above, irrespective
of their job titles.
 BEPAM Sustainability practices in this study refer to practices aimed towards achieving
5,2 sustainable development in the delivery of construction projects. These practices
are at both pre-construction, construction and post construction stages of
construction project cycle and may include sustainable design, procurement, site
waste management, materials and resources use, whole life costing, etc. This study
is therefore not necessary about how construction organizations can save papers
186 and cartridges but rather how to deliver sustainable construction projects.
Throughout the context of this paper, the following terms are used interchangeably:
“leadership” and “intra-organizational leadership”, and “sustainability” and “sustainable
development”. Intra-organizational leadership means leadership within organizations
and sustainability refers to the development that considers the “triple bottom line” of
Downloaded by LONDON SOUTH BANK UNIVERSITY At 09:13 01 May 2015 (PT)

people, planet and profit.

3. Leadership theories and styles

The role of leadership is formally or informally developed within the group and it is the
necessary role of the leader to organize, motivate and assign task in the group towards
its achievement. The definition of leadership is continually shifting and difficult
to define because it’s very much contextual (Bryman et al., 2002). There are over 350
definitions of the term leadership that have been developed so as to develop the
fundamental theory of leadership (Daft, 2005). The most consistent definition of
leadership is that of a process of influence and such influence can come from both
internal and external stakeholders of the organization (Yukl, 2006). Leadership is now
being considered as a process of influencing organizational direction and vision,
occurring through the relationships between leaders and their followers (Taylor et al.,
2011). It is argued that, leadership is primarily about influencing individuals to go
beyond their selfish short-term interests, to contribute to the long-term performance
of the whole group (Northouse, 2010). However, Tabassi and Abu Bakar (2010) add that
leadership is not just a process; but a process that involves influences, that occurs
within a group context, involving personal discovery and development as well as
involvement in goal attainment.

3.1 Leadership theories

All of the theories of leadership are correct in one way or other and such theories deal
with a leader’s move toward the business environment and the follower’s opinion of
a leader’s performance (Northouse, 2010). Some leadership theories centre on the
nature of the leader, their personality and traits; whereas other theories centre on
identifying the different roles of leaders in terms of what leaders do rather than their
characteristics. Some leadership theories also view leadership as specific to the
situation based on the idea that different situations require different leadership styles
(Dearlove and Coomber, 2005). Leadership theories identified by Munshi et al. (2005)
include traits and styles; contingency; transformational/transactional; distributed
and structuralist leadership theories. Different schools of leadership theory have
evolved over the past several decades such as leadership traits and style, leadership
behaviour, contingency approaches, leader-member exchange (LMX), great man
leadership theory, transformational leadership, charismatic leadership theory and
shared leadership (Bass and Avolio, 1994; Munshi et al., 2005; DeChurch et al., 2010;
Yang et al., 2011). A summary of the leadership theories is presented in Table I. The
next section discusses the common leadership styles exhibited by leaders
in organizations.
 Leadership theory Characteristics Source
UK
construction
The trait approach Individual leader’s characteristics or approaches define the Yukl (1998) industry
trait/style of leadership
Trait leadership theories believe leaders are born and not
made
The behavioural theory Deals with the styles adopted by the leaders for their Bryman
particular task (1992) 187
Detail specific behaviours related with effective leadership
Believe that leaders are made, not born
The contingency theory It is about the appropriateness of different leadership styles Burns (1978)
(situational theory) in different leadership situations
Downloaded by LONDON SOUTH BANK UNIVERSITY At 09:13 01 May 2015 (PT)

The leader-member Believes that leaders form differentiated patterns of Yukl (2006)
exchange (LMX) relationships with their subordinates
Deals with the direct relationship between leaders and
followers
Great man leadership Believe that great leaders are born to lead; they are Bass et al.
extraordinary and exceptional people (2003)
Transformational Transformational is concerned for relationships while Bass and Table I.
leadership transactional is about concern for process; all aimed at Avolio (1993) Summary of
improving leadership outcomes leadership theories

3.2 Leadership styles

There have been several studies on how leaders and their styles of leadership
promote change (Bryman, 2004) and it is now believed that individual
leadership style is a very important factor in innovation (Dess and Picken, 2000).
Toor and Ofori (2006) describe leadership style as a combined outcome of the leader’s
self-related cognitive information, personality traits, the primary motives, and
thoughts on operating situational variables. It is important that the overall
leadership style adopted suit the organization’s beliefs, values and assumptions.
There are different types of leadership styles, each proving effective depending on
the given circumstances, attitude, beliefs, preferences and values of the people
involved. Tabassi and Abu Bakar (2010) add that effective leadership style is critical
to all successful projects and organizations. Nicolaou-Smokoviti (2004, p. 410) defines
leadership style as:
A stable mode of behaviour that the leader uses in his or her effort to increase his or her
influence, which constitutes the essence of leadership.
Many styles of leadership have been proposed for organizational leaders including;
transactional, transformational, charismatic, democratic, servant, autocratic, consultative,
laissez faire, joint decision making, authoritative, participative, tyrant, task oriented,
relationship oriented, production-oriented, employee-oriented, delegating, authority-
compliance, impoverished management and team management, etc. (Toor and
Ofori, 2006). It is suggested that different leadership styles are appropriate in different
circumstances and the style of a leader has a major influence on the performance
of their organization.
Transformational leadership motivate subordinates to perform beyond the expected
levels of performance and can be identified with the goals and the interest of the
organization (Bass and Avolio, 1994; Gardner and Avolio, 1998). Transformational
leaders lead by example to influence followers moral, emotional, affective and cognitive
 BEPAM behaviour by showing positive qualities and ethics (Bass and Riggio, 2006;
5,2 Zhu et al., 2011). Such leaders therefore make decisions that promote ethical policies,
procedures and processes in their organizations (Avolio, 2005; Zhu et al., 2011).
Brown and Trevino (2006) cited the seminal work of Burns (1978) which suggested
that transformational leaders motivate their followers to think beyond self-interest
and work together for a shared cause because of their moral qualities. It is argued
188 that such qualities exhibited by transformational leaders support and promote
innovations in organizations they lead.
Transactional leadership monitor performance and take the necessary corrective
action. Transactional leaders can inculcate moral standards in an organization through
effective ethical structures because they have a positive impact on the followers’ moral
Downloaded by LONDON SOUTH BANK UNIVERSITY At 09:13 01 May 2015 (PT)

personality (Zhu et al., 2011). However, transactional leadership does not possess the
same level of morality when compared with that of the transformational leadership
(Bass and Steidlmeier, 1999). Charismatic leaders are very good at shaping the values
of others (Brown and Trevino, 2009). They are regarded as visionary leaders who foster
good relationships with their follows to achieve excellent performance of the
organization’s vision through personal characters and behaviours (Hayibor et al., 2011).
The charismatic leadership style communicates vision, energizes others and accelerates
innovation processes such as sustainability.
Ethical leaders possess characteristics such as honesty, caring, and principles.
Ethical leaders communicate with their followers on ethics, set clear ethical
standards, use rewards and punishments and make fair and balanced decisions
(Brown and Trevino, 2006). Riggio et al. (2010) define an ethical leader as the one
who demonstrates prudence, temperance, fortitude and justice in their personal
characteristics and actions.
Authentic leadership has recently emerged as another form of leadership
which compliments the work on ethical and transformational leadership (Avolio
and Gardner, 2005; Avolio et al., 2004). Authentic leaders are not necessarily
transformational, visionary or charismatic leaders (May et al., 2003), however, they
incorporate transformational and ethical leadership qualities (Avolio et al., 2004),
demonstrate a higher moral ability and are guided by a set of ideals (Lloyd-Walker
and Walker, 2011). Visionary leaders (transformational, charismatic) create a
strategic vision of some organizational future to achieve high levels of cohesion,
commitment, trust, motivation and hence performance in the new organizational
environments (Zhu et al., 2011). Avery (2004) describes visionary leaders as people
who employ a collaborative style for making decisions, share problems with their
followers and seek consensus before the leaders make the final decision.
Strategic leadership theory is thought to be similar to the trait theories, it is,
however, different as it focuses on individuals at the top of an organization and their
effect on strategic processes and results (DeChurch et al., 2010). Strategic leadership
style is believed to be the most appropriate leadership style for organizations
implementing corporate social responsibility strategies.
Laissez-faire leadership represents a leadership style in which the leader avoids
making decisions, uses their authority and relinquishes responsibility. A laissez-
faire leader chooses to avoid taking action and avoid leading. It is believed to
be the most passive and ineffective form of leadership (Antonakis et al., 2003).
Understanding the characteristics exhibited by each style/behaviour of leadership
enhance the interview process and the design of the multifactor leadership questionnaire
(MLQ).
 3.3 Multifactor leadership and sustainable leadership questionnaires (SLQ) UK
The MLQ was first developed in 1985 to measure transformational and transactional construction
leadership but has been revised several times since its inception (Bass, 1985); MLQ
Form 5X is the most recent version that measures a full range of leadership styles (Bass
industry
and Avolio, 2000). The most widely used survey instrument to assess the multifactor
leadership theory has been the MLQ that covers a range of leadership behaviours
(Avolio and Bass, 2002; Lowe and Gardner, 2000; Antonakis et al., 2003). The MLQ 189
Form 5X consists of 45 items with 12 constructs that measure the following four
dimensions: transactional leadership, transformational leadership, non-transactional
leadership and outcomes of leadership (Bass and Avolio, 2000). SLQ instrument was
developed by McCann and Holt (2010) to define sustainable leadership and ensure
Downloaded by LONDON SOUTH BANK UNIVERSITY At 09:13 01 May 2015 (PT)

organizations can determine the quantifiable level of sustainable leadership from

employees’ perspectives. The SLQ consist of 15 statements used to measure employees’
perception of leadership sustainable behaviour. The MLQ and SLQ both use a
five-point likert scale ranging from 0 to 4 (where 0 ¼ not at all; 1 ¼ once in a while;
2 ¼ sometimes; 3 ¼ fairly often; and 4 ¼ frequently, if not always) providing a score
average for all the items in the scale. The results show self-perceived leadership
style/behaviour as a score that indicates how frequently each survey component is
used by the respondent (Bass and Avolio, 2000; McCann and Holt, 2010). This paper
produced a leadership style questionnaire consisting of 18 descriptive statements
covering six leadership styles in order to establish styles/behaviours associated with
intra-organizational leaders promoting sustainable construction practices in the UK
construction industry.

4. Methodology
Leadership research is mainly associated with a quantitative research approach
that is epistemologically guided mainly by positivistic assumptions (Ospina, 2004;
Bryman, 2011). However, literature evidence shows that several researchers have
combined qualitative and quantitative approaches in their studies to achieve their
research objectives (Toor and Ofori, 2008b). Leadership research in the construction
industry mostly uses quantitative methodologies, using survey questionnaires
to collect data whilst there is also some use of qualitative methodologies based
on interviews and case studies (Toor and Ofori, 2008b). Finally, Bryman (2011)
argues that, leadership is best understood through diverse theoretical positions,
research methods and the examination of a great variety of research contexts
and settings.
This study therefore adopts a mixed methods research approach that provides both
qualitative and quantitative evidence which gives a more complete picture of the
engaged sustainability practices in UK construction organizations. Mixed methods
research aims at drawing from the strengths of each research approach and minimizing
the weaknesses of any single research studies ( Johnson and Onwuegbuzie, 2004).
Whilst the use of qualitative studies provide an in-depth insights through subjective
interpretations of experiences, adopting mixed methods allow researchers to minimise
and reduce the over-dependence on statistical data to explain a social occurrence and
experiences which are mostly subjective in nature ( Jogulu and Pansiri, 2011). Creswell
(2003) identified that, using mixed methods research provides strengths that offset the
weaknesses of both quantitative and qualitative research. It also provides more
comprehensive evidence for studying a research problem than either using quantitative
or qualitative research alone.
 BEPAM 4.1 Data collection and analysis
5,2 The selection of the most suitable data collection method depends largely on the
intention of the research objectives and the type of data needed for the research.
A mixed method data collection approach using both interview and questionnaire
research techniques was adopted to achieve the research aim. The interviews were
aimed at obtaining detailed information, perceptions and opinions from leaders within
190 UK construction organizations charged with the promotion of sustainability practices
on how their organizations are actively engaged in sustainability practices in the
delivery of construction projects. Questionnaires were used to eliminate bias associated
with interviews and also to obtain more superficial and wider views of respondents
from the UK construction industry (Yin, 2003).
Downloaded by LONDON SOUTH BANK UNIVERSITY At 09:13 01 May 2015 (PT)

4.1.1 Qualitative data collection and analysis. The interview sample were selected
from both contractor and consulting organizations in the UK construction industry.
Semi- structured interviews were carried out with 15 intra-organizational leaders from
the UK construction industry charged with the promotion of sustainable construction
project delivery. This purposeful sample was developed by initially contacting the top
150 consultants and contractor organizations operating in UK as published in the
September 2010 edition of the Building Magazine. This process was to ensure that
the interview participants cover a wide range of intra-organizational leadership with
direct experience and knowledge in sustainable construction. These leaders were
responsible for promoting and implementing environmental, social and economic
sustainability issues in their respective organizations. Even though there are variations
in the job titles of the interviewees, all were responsible for driving forward the agenda
relating to sustainable practices in construction project delivery in their
organizations. All interviews were held in confidentiality and recorded with
participant permission. The interviews lasted between 45 and 60 minutes.
Qualitative data were collected through in-depth semi- structured interviews were
carried out with eight intra-organizational leaders from consultant organization.
These consultant organizations include project management, cost management,
structural and architectural firms. During the second stage of the interviews, seven
intra-organizational leaders from contracting organizations charged with the
promotion of sustainability practices were interviewed. The profile of leaders
(sustainability professionals) within UK construction organizations who were
interviewed included sustainable construction manager, head of sustainability,
senior sustainability consultant, corporate sustainability manager, principal
sustainability engineer, associate head of sustainability, associate: sustainability
manager, sustainability consultant, senior sustainability manager, environmental manager,
head of sustainable development, sustainability manager, director of environment,
principal sustainability consultant and environmental manager/advisor. Despite
the variation in job titles, all the above intra-organizational leaders interviewed
have responsibilities within their respective construction organizations to promote
sustainability practices in the delivery of construction projects.
4.1.2 Quantitative data collection and analysis. An analysis of the survey data shows
that a response rate of 63 per cent was achieved representing 126 responses out of 200
questionnaires sent. However, 10 per cent of responses were discarded as not being
fully complete. This result can be considered as being excellent, according to Golland
(2002) who suggested that, for a postal survey, a response rate of 30-40 per cent
is considered good, and one over 50 per cent is considered excellent. However,
 Archer (2008) argued that, the response rate for a web-based survey varies based on the UK
survey type. The overall average response rate for a web-based survey is 48.3 per cent construction
as evidenced by the results of a research involving the calculated response rates of
84 web-based surveys deployed over 33 months. To increase the response rate of the
industry
survey for this study, respondents were contacted by telephone to obtain personal
e-mails before sending the surveys out; follow-up reminder e-mails were sent two weeks
after the initial distribution. 191
Respondents’ organizational type, size and job title. The results of the survey show
that, 49 per cent of respondents are from contractor organizations while, 51 per cent
of respondents are from consultant organizations in the UK. There was a slight
difference in the number of respondents who responded in terms of their principal
Downloaded by LONDON SOUTH BANK UNIVERSITY At 09:13 01 May 2015 (PT)

business activities. Respondents from consultant organizational background were

2 per cent more than that of respondents from contractor organizations. The
respondents to the questionnaire were asked to classify their construction
organizations in terms of the size of employees. The respondents ranged from small
to large construction organizations. However, most respondents were situated in large
sized organizations; having over 250 employees. This equated to almost 54 per cent
of overall respondents. Small size organizations employing up to 50 people form
17 per cent of the respondents. The result also shows that, 29 per cent of respondents
belong to construction organizations employing 50 to 250 people.

5. Findings and discussions

5.1 Interview findings and discussions
The main aim of this paper is to establish the leadership styles of intra-organizational
leaders who are leading the sustainability agenda. Leadership questionnaires were
used during the interviews to help understand the leadership styles associated with the
interview participants. The leadership styles identified among the intra-organizational
leaders interviewed were strategic, democratic, charismatic and transformational. The
interview was guided by the use of the Multifactor leadership and SLQs. Strategic
leadership style was the most commonly identified style among the intra-
organizational leaders in UK construction organizations as shown in samples quotes
from interviewees below. Most intra-organizational leaders interviewed described
themselves as strategic and influential in the development and implementation
of sustainability strategies. As interviewee “D” observed:
I am in a strategic role, active in the development of our sustainability strategy. I continue
to influence the direction of the company in relation to sustainability and to help drive the ethos
within the company through various mediums including engagement with stakeholders.
Also, interviewee “J” reflected on his leadership style by saying:
I would say it was strategic, but also practical. Everything we do when collecting data,
complying with legislation, etc. must be easy and practical to achieve.
Furthermore, interviewee “B” put it simply by saying:
My style is strategic; outcome driven and influential.
Finally, interviewee “A” described his style of leadership by pointing out that, he is:
Transformational, and focused on creating opportunities. I am also strategic; all power
of influence with very little power due to position of authority.
 BEPAM The discussions from the interviews show various leadership styles employed by
5,2 intra-organizational leaders in UK construction organizations; however, Figure 1 shows
words frequently used by leaders when describing their style of leadership.
The process of essential change such as a change towards sustainability begins with
a strategic vision that leaders have for their organization. An intra-organizational
leadership style could influence the successful implementation and integration
192 of sustainability practices within an organization. Most leaders describe their style as
strategic influencing on the sustainability strategies within their organizations
as evidence in the word frequency diagram above.
Downloaded by LONDON SOUTH BANK UNIVERSITY At 09:13 01 May 2015 (PT)

The following items provides a description of leadership style or behviour. Respond to each item
according to the way you are most likely to act as leader. The word “other” may mean your subordinates,
clients, or company employees. Tick one of the options to the right of each item to indicate your response KEY:
0 = Never 1 = Once in a while 2 = Sometimes 3 = Fairly often 4 = Frequently, if not always*

0 1 2 3 4

I go beyond self-interest for the good of the organization

The best decision will be the one with the largest consensus

I make decisions without consultion others due to time pressures upon the task at hand

I make clear what one can expect to receive when perfomance goals are achieved

I avoid making decisions

I tend to overcome barriers to reach goals

I consider the moral and ethical consequences of my decisions

I welcome others to constantly challenge my ideas and strategies

I rarely back down when I am truly passionate about something

I provide recognition/rewards when others reach their goals

Whatever others want to do is ok with me

I’m good at finding practical solutions to problems

I help others to develop their strengths

I try to delegate as many tasks as possible in their complete entirety

I need to push half ot the people into completing work to a higher standard

I keep track of all mistakes

Figure 1. I ask no more of others than what is absolutely essential

Copy of leadership
style questionnaire I have a clear focus on what we need to do as organization
used in the survey
 5.2 Survey findings and discussions UK
The leadership styles and behaviours of intra-organizational leaders were measured construction
in this study using a questionnaire designed from the current version of the MLQ, form
5X revised (Avolio and Bass, 2002) and the sustainability leadership questionnaire
industry
(SLQ) (McCann and Holt, 2010). A copy of the leadership questionnaire used in the
survey is shown in Figure 2. The survey consists of 18 descriptive statements covering
six leadership styles: transformational, democratic, autocratic, transactional, laissez 193
fair and strategic leadership styles. Respondents were asked to judge how frequently
each statement matched their style of leadership. To determine each leadership style,
the score of three specific items on the questionnaire was added as detailed below:
• transformational leadership style (1, 7, 13)
Downloaded by LONDON SOUTH BANK UNIVERSITY At 09:13 01 May 2015 (PT)

• democratic leadership style (2, 8, 14)

• autocratic leadership style (3, 9, 15)
• transactional leadership style (4, 10, 16)
• laissez fair leadership style (5, 11, 17)
• strategic leadership style (6, 12, 18)
Each item is given a score of 0 to 4, where 0 ¼ “never”; 1 ¼ “once in a while”;
2 ¼ “sometimes”; 3 ¼ “fairly often”; and 4 ¼ “frequently, if not always”. A total score of
9-12 shows a high level, a moderate level has a score of 5-8 and a score of 0-4 shows a
low level of style or behaviour.
A detail statistical result of the survey is presented in Table II and illustrated
graphically in Figure 3. Taken as a whole, the total mean for strategic leadership style
was 9.85. The average mean for the three items under this style of leadership was 3.28
with a standard deviation of 0.77. With a potential score of 0 to 4, it can be seen that a
score of 3.28 which is above the middle score of 2.00 portrays a “fairly often” act by
leaders promoting sustainability practices. The above shows that, most of the survey
respondents are likely to act strategically in terms of their leadership style when dealing
with the implementation of sustainability practices. This result supports the findings of
the interview that, most leaders when charged with the role of promoting sustainable
construction are strategic in their style or behaviour. Strategic leaders inspire others to

Figure 2.
Word frequency
query of
interviewees’ style
of leadership
 BEPAM Average
5,2 Ref. Leadership behaviour/style n Sum Mean mean SD

Transformational 3.14
1 I go beyond self-interest for the good of the organization 106 326 3.08 0.847
7 Consider the moral and ethical consequences of my
decisions 106 353 3.33 0.752
194 13 I help others to develop their strengths 106 319 3.01 0.697
998 9.42 2.296
Democratic 2.45
2 The best decision will be the one with the largest
consensus 106 214 2.02 0.828
Downloaded by LONDON SOUTH BANK UNIVERSITY At 09:13 01 May 2015 (PT)

8 I welcome others to constantly challenge my ideas and

strategies 106 336 3.17 0.878
14 I try to delegate as many tasks as possible in their
complete entirety 106 228 2.15 1.031
778 7.34 2.737
Autocratic 2.03
3 I make decisions without consulting others due to time
pressures upon the task at hand 106 167 1.58 0.904
9 I rarely back down when I am truly passionate about
something 106 286 2.7 1.034
15 I need to push half of the people into completing work to
a higher standard 106 193 1.82 0.984
646 6.1 2.922
Transactional 2.58
4 I make clear what one can expect to receive when
performance goals are achieved 106 300 2.83 0.941
10 I provide recognition/rewards when others reach
their goals 106 306 2.89 0.797
16 I keep track of all mistakes 106 213 2.01 1.065
819 7.73 2.803
Laissez faire 1.22
5 I avoid making decisions 106 56 0.53 0.771
11 Whatever others want to do is ok with me 106 135 1.27 0.911
17 I ask no more of others than what is absolute essential 106 197 1.86 0.97
388 3.66 2.652
Strategic
6 I tend to overcome barriers to reach goals 106 338 3.19 3.28 0.732
Table II. 12 I’m good at finding practical solutions to problems 106 358 3.38 0.71
Score of respondents’ 18 I have a clear focus on what we need to do as
leadership style or organization 106 348 3.28 0.778
behaviour 1,044 9.85 2.22

take the appropriate action, with the best interests of the business, the people and the
planet in mind, strategic leaders motivate others to take the initiative to improve their
input into the organization and encourage employees to best prepare
the company for the future (Ireland and Hitt, 1999; Zaccaro, 1996).
The second leadership style to be rated was transformational with an average
mean value of 3.14. This results also portrays a “fairly often” act by respondents
who scored this style. A transformational leader creates a vision, empowers
followers, develop a spirit of cooperation based around a leadership role model with
high values to help others contribute to the organization acting as a change agent
 Leadership Style
UK
Strategic
I have a clear focus on what we need to do as...
construction
I’m good at finding practical solutions to problems industry
I tend to overcome barriers to reach goals
Laissez faire
I ask no more of others than what is absolute essential
Whatever others want to do is ok with me 195
I avoid making decisions
Transactional
Leadership Behaviour

I keep track of all mistakes

I provide recognition/rewards when others reach...
Downloaded by LONDON SOUTH BANK UNIVERSITY At 09:13 01 May 2015 (PT)

I make clear what one can expect to receive when...

Autocratic
I need to push half of the people into completing...
I rarely back down when I am truly passionate about...
I make decisions without consulting others due to...
Democratic
I try to delegate as many tasks as possible in their...
I welcome others to constantly challenge my ideas...
The best decision will be the one with the largest...
Transformational
I help others to develop their strengths
Consider the moral and ethical consequences of my... Figure 3.
I go beyond self-interest for the good of the... Respondents
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
leadership style/
behaviour
Mean Score

(Northouse, 2010). The third prevailing leadership style was transactional with an
average mean of 2.58 which is more closer to 3; “fairly often” behaviour.
Transactional leaders tell others what to do in order to be rewarded and recognise
their accomplishment (Bass and Steidlmeier, 1999). The least popular leadership
style among intra-organizational leaders in UK construction organizations is the
laissez-faire approach with an average mean of 1.22. The laissez-faire leadership
require little of others, are content to let things ride and let others do their own thing
(Antonakis et al., 2003).
An analysis was carried out to determine the strength of the relationship among the
variables (behavioural statements), based on correlation coefficients of the variables.
Table III shows the correlation matrix table for the leadership style or behaviour
variables/statements for SLQ questionnaire. The results show that correlation
coefficient exists between some variable and no association also exists among other
variable. This was because of the similarity and differences in the nature of the
leadership styles these factors were addressing.

6. Conclusions
Leadership styles identified through literature and interviews included
transformational, democratic, strategic, charismatic, transactional and laissez-faire
leadership styles. Different leadership styles lead to different behavioural consequences
and there is no style that is best in all situations. Leaders should, however, be flexible
and match their style with each different situation. A strategic leader inspires others
 Downloaded by LONDON SOUTH BANK UNIVERSITY At 09:13 01 May 2015 (PT)

5,2

196

factors
Table III.
BEPAM

for the leadership

style or behaviour
Correlation matrix
Spearman’s ρ correlation matrix
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

1 I go beyond self-interest for

the good of the organization 1 0.044 0.07 0.17 −0.051 0.111 0.178 0.124 0.034 0.334** −0.262** 0.225* 0.163 0.044 −0.017 −0.087 −0.099 0.156
2 The best decision will be the
one with the largest
consensus 0.044 1 −0.032 0.127 −0.14 0.224* 0.137 0.184 0.163 0.07 0.082 0.08 0.078 0.091 0.102 0.064 −0.01 −0.025
3 I make decisions without
consulting others due to
time pressures upon the
task at hand 0.07 −0.032 1 −0.049 0.057 −0.08 −0.210* −0.059 0.045 0.175 0.132 −0.073 0.142 0.107 0.184 −0.128 −0.076 0.044
4 I make clear what one can
expect to receive when
performance goals are
achieved 0.17 0.127 −0.049 1 −0.315** 0.380** 0.335** 0.359** 0.176 0.369** −0.095 0.343** 0.303** 0.111 0.02 0.138 0.107 0.392**
5 I avoid making decisions −0.051 −0.14 0.057 −0.315** 1 −0.269** −0.105 −0.287** −0.12 −0.054 0.063 −0.384** −0.247* −0.223* −0.173 0.017 0.13 −0.391**
6 I tend to overcome barriers
to reach goals 0.111 0.224* −0.08 0.380** −0.269** 1 0.406** 0.368** 0.153 0.254** 0.039 0.325** 0.298** 0.017 0.187 0.102 0.13 0.295**
7 Consider the moral and
ethical consequences of
my decisions 0.178 0.137 −0.210* 0.335** −0.105 0.406** 1 0.384** 0.097 0.287** −0.276** 0.145 0.240* 0.084 −0.092 0.099 0.136 0.062
8 I welcome others to
constantly challenge my
ideas and strategies 0.124 0.184 −0.059 0.359** −0.287** 0.368** 0.384** 1 0.202* 0. 172 −0.081 0.121 0.159 0.073 0.126 0.152 −0.053 0.211*
9 I rarely back down when I
am truly passionate about
something 0.034 0.163 0.045 0.176 −0.12 0.153 0.097 0.202* 1 0.212* 0.062 0.191* 0.195* 0.166 0.242* 0.079 0.099 0.202*
10 I provide recognition/
rewards when others reach
their goals 0.334** 0.07 0.175 0.369** −0.054 0.254** 0.287** 0.172 0.212* 1 −0.181 0.270** 0.330** 0.025 −0.086 0.047 0.079 0.206*

(continued )
 Downloaded by LONDON SOUTH BANK UNIVERSITY At 09:13 01 May 2015 (PT)

Spearman’s ρ correlation matrix

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

11 Whatever others want to do

is ok with me −0.262** 0.082 0.132 −0.095 0.063 0.039 −0.276** −0.081 0.062 −0.181 1 −0.141 −0.154 0.022 0.068 −0.021 −0.007 −0.09
12 I’m good at finding practical
solutions to problems 0.225* 0.08 −0.073 0.343** −0.384** 0.325** 0.145 0.121 0.191* 0.270* −0.141 1 0.430** 0.118 0.116 0.049 0.028 0.353**
13 I help others to develop their
strengths 0.163 0.078 0.142 0.303** −0.247* 0.298** 0.240* 0.159 0.195* 0.330** −0.154 0.430** 1 0.238* 0.325** 0.053 0.185 0.381**
14 I try to delegate as many
tasks as possible in their
complete entirety 0.044 0.091 0.107 0.111 −0.223* 0.017 0.084 0.073 0.166 0.025 0.022 0.118 0.238* 1 0.333** 0.085 0.196* 0.12
15 I need to push half of the
people into completing work
to a higher standard −0.017 0.102 0.184 0.02 −0.173 0.187 −0.092 0.126 0.242* −0.086 0.068 0.116 0.325** 0.333** 1 0.103 0.225* 0.086
16 I keep track of all mistakes −0.087 0.064 −0.128 0.138 0.017 0.102 0.099 0.152 0.079 0.047 −0.021 0.049 0.053 0.085 0.103 1 0.267** 0.06
17 I ask no more of others than
what is absolute essential −0.099 −0.01 −0.076 0.107 0.13 0.13 0.136 −0.053 0.099 0.079 −0.007 0.028 0.185 0.196* 0.225* 0.267** 1 −0.04
18 I have a clear focus on what
we need to do as
organization 0.156 −0.025 0.044 0.392** −0.391** 0.295** 0.062 0.211* 0.202* 0.206* −0.09 0.353** 0.381** 0.12 0.086 0.06 −0.04 1
Notes: **,*Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level, 0 05 levels (two-tailed), respectively
construction
industry

Table III.
UK

197
 BEPAM to take the appropriate action, with the best interests of the business, the people and the
5,2 planet in mind. A transformational leader creates a vision, empower followers and
develop a spirit of cooperation while transactional leaders tell others what to do in order
to be rewarded and recognise their accomplishment. However, the laissez-faire
leadership require little of others, are content to let things ride and let others do their
own thing.
198 Intra-organizational leaders charged with the promotion of sustainable
construction practices in the UK construction industry adopt different styles in
their desire to embed sustainability practices in their organizations. However, the
strategic leadership style was the most common style/behaviour among intra-
organizational leaders promoting sustainability practices in the UK construction
Downloaded by LONDON SOUTH BANK UNIVERSITY At 09:13 01 May 2015 (PT)

industry. The findings of this study could help organizational leaders who seek to
promote sustainability practices adopt and shape their style of leadership in order
to achieve the desired outcome. This paper therefore bridges the gap in literature on
the link between leadership and sustainability in construction management
research. The study also provides the bases for further research into the leadership
style of sustainability professionals in the UK construction industry. A further
investigation into the reason why intra-organizational leaders are describing their
style as strategic and its effectiveness for the promotion of sustainability practices
in the UK construction industry would be essential.

References
Antonakis, J., Avolio, B.J. and Sivasubramaniam, N. (2003), “Context and leadership:
an examination of the nine-factor full-range leadership theory using the multifactor
leadership questionnaire”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 261-295.
Archer, T.M. (2008), “Response rates to expect from web-based surveys and what to do about it”,
Journal of Extension, Vol. 46 No. 3, available at: www.joe.org/joe/2008june/rb3.php
(accessed on 20 July 2012).
Avery, G.C. (2004), Understanding Leadership: Paradigms and Cases, Sage, London.
Avolio, B.J. (2005), Leadership Development in Balance: Made/born, Lawrence Erlbaum Mahwah,
New Jersey.
Avolio, B.J. and Bass, B.M. (2002), Manual for the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire
(Form 5X), Mind Garden, Redwood City, CA.
Avolio, B.J. and Gardner, W.L. (2005), “Authentic leadership development: getting to the root of
positive forms of leadership”, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 315-338.
Avolio, B., Luthans, F. and Walumbwa, F.O. (2004), “Authentic leadership: theory building for
veritable sustained performance”, working paper, Gallup Leadership Institute, University
of Nebraska, Lincoln.
Bass, B.M. (1985), Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectation, Free Press, New York, NY.
Bass, B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1994), Improving Organizational Effectiveness Through
Transformational Leadership, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Bass, B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1993), “Transformational leadership: a response to critique”,
in Chemers, M.M. and Ayman, R. (Eds), Leadership Theory and Research: Perspectives and
Directions, Academic Press Inc., San Diego, CA, pp. 49-88.
Bass, B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (2000), MLQ Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, Mind Garden,
Redwood City.
 Bass, B., Avolio, B., Jung, D. and Berson, Y. (2003), “Predicting unit performance by assessing UK
transformational and transactional leadership”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88
No. 2, pp. 207-218.
construction
Bass, B.M. and Steidlmeier, P. (1999), “Ethics, character, and authentic transformational
industry
leadership behaviour”, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 181-217.
Bass, B.M. and Riggio, R.E. (2006), Transformational Leadership, 2nd ed., Lawrence Erlbaum,
Mahwah, NJ. 199
Bossink, B.A.G. (2007), “Leadership for sustainable innovation”, International Journal of
Technology Management and Sustainable Development, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 135-149.
Brown, M.E. and Trevino, L.K. (2009), “Leader–follower values congruence: are socialized
charismatic leaders better able to achieve it?”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 94 No. 2,
Downloaded by LONDON SOUTH BANK UNIVERSITY At 09:13 01 May 2015 (PT)

pp. 478-490.
Brown, M.E. and Trevino, L.K. (2006), “Ethical leadership: a review and future directions”,
The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 17 No. 6, pp. 595-616.
Bryman, A., Stephens, M. and Campo, C. (2002), “The importance of context: qualitative research
and the study of leadership”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 353-370.
Bryman, A. (1992), Charisma and Leadership in Organization, Sage, London.
Bryman, A. (2004), “Qualitative research on leadership: a critical but appreciative review”,
The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 15 No. 6, pp. 729-769.
Bryman, A. (2011), “Mission accomplished? Research methods in the first five years of
leadership”, Leadership, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 73-83.
Burns, J.M. (1978), Leadership, Harper and Row, New York, NY.
Creswell, J.W. (2003), Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approach,
2nd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Daft, R.L. (2005), The Leadership Experience, 3rd ed., Thomson South-Western, Mason, OH.
Dearlove, D. and Coomber, S. (2005), “A leadership miscellany”, in Crainer, S., Goffee, R. and
Yip, G.S. (Eds), Business Strategy Review, Autumn 2005, Special Report: Leadership,
London Business School, London, pp. 53-58.
DeChurch, L.S., Hiller, N.J., Murase, T., Daniel Doty, D. and Salas, E. (2010), “Leadership across
levels: levels of leaders and their levels of impact”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 21 No. 6,
pp. 1069-1085.
Dess, G.G. and Picken, J.C. (2000), “Changing roles: leadership in the 21st century”, Organizational
Dynamics, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 18-33.
Doh, J. (2002), “Can leadership be taught? Perspectives from management educators”, Academy of
Management Learning and Education, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 54-67.
Egan, J. (1998), Re-Thinking Construction: Report of the Construction Industry Task Force,
Department for Environment Transport and the Regions (DETR), London.
Fellows, R., Liu, A. and Fong, C.M. (2003), “Leadership style and power relations in quantity
surveying in Hong Kong”, Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 21 No. 8,
pp. 809-818.
Ferdig, M. (2007), “Sustainability leadership: co-creating a sustainable future”, Journal of Change
Management, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 25-35.
Gardner, W.L. and Avolio, B.J. (1998), “The charismatic relationship: a dramaturgical
perspective”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 32-58.
Gattiker, T.F. and Carter, C.R. (2010), “Understanding project champions ability to gain
intra-organizational commitment for environmental projects”, Journal of Operations
Management, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 72-85.
 BEPAM Giritli, H. and Oraz, G.T. (2004), “Leadership styles: some evidence from the Turkish construction
industry”, Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 253-262.
5,2
Golland, A. (2002), Research Methods-Practical Research Issues: Questionnaires and Interviews,
The Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham.
Groetsch, D.L. and Davis, S.B. (2006), Quality Management: Introduction to Total Quality
Management for Production, Processing, and Services, 5th ed., Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper
200 Saddle River, NJ.
Hayibor, S., Agle, B.R., Sears, G.J., Sonnenfeld, J.A. and Ward, A. (2011), “Value congruence and
charismatic leadership in CEO–top manager relationships: an empirical investigation”,
Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 102 No. 1, pp. 237-254.
Ireland, R.D. and Hitt, M.A. (1999), “Achieving and maintaining strategic competence in the 21st
Downloaded by LONDON SOUTH BANK UNIVERSITY At 09:13 01 May 2015 (PT)

century: the role of strategic leadership”, Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 13 No. 1,
pp. 43-57.
Johnson, B.R. and Onwuegbuzie, A.J. (2004), “Mixed methods research: a research paradigm
whose time has come”, Educational Researcher, Vol. 33 No. 7, pp. 14-26.
Jogulu, U.D. and Pansiri, J. (2011), “Mixed methods: a research design for management doctoral
dissertations”, Management Research Review, Vol. 34 No. 6, pp. 687-701.
Latham, S.M. (1994), Constructing the Team: Report of the Government/Industry Review of
Procurement and Contractual Arrangements in the UK Construction Industry, HMSO,
London.
Lloyd-Walker, B. and Walker, D. (2011), “Authentic leadership for 21st century project delivery”,
International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 383-395.
Lowe, K.B. and Gardner, W.L. (2000), “Ten years of the leadership quarterly: contributions and
challenges for the future”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 11 No. 11, pp. 459-514.
May, D.R., Chan, A.Y.L., Hodges, T.D. and Avolio, B.J. (2003), “Developing the moral component
of authentic leadership”, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 247-260.
McCann, J.T. and Holt, R.A. (2010), “Servant and sustainable leadership: analysis in the
manufacturing environment”, International Journal of Management Practice, Vol. 4 No. 2,
pp. 134-148.
Munshi, N., Oke, A., Stafylarakis, M., Puranam, P., Towells, S., Moslein, K. and Neely, A. (2005),
“Leading for innovation: the impact of leadership on innovation”, AIM Executive Briefings,
Advanced Institute of Management Research (AIM), London.
Newton, S. (2009), “New directions in leadership”, Construction Innovation, Vol. 9 No. 2,
pp. 129-132.
Nicolaou-Smokoviti, L. (2004), “Business leaders work environment and leadership styles”,
Current Sociology, Vol. 52 No. 3, pp. 407-427.
Northouse, P.G. (2010), Leadership: Theory and Practice, 5th ed., Sage Publications Ltd, London.
Ofori, G. and Toor, S.R. (2008), “Leadership: a pivotal factor for sustainable development”,
Construction Information Quarterly, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 67-72.
Ospina, S. (2004), “Qualitative research”, in Goethals, G.R., Sorenson, G.J. and MacGregor Burns, J.
(Eds), Encyclopaedia of Leadership, Sage Publications, London, pp. 1279-1284.
Riches, C. (1997), “Managing for people and performance”, in Bush, T. and Middlewood, T. (Eds),
Managing People in Education, Paul Chapman Publishing Limited, London, pp. 15-30.
Riggio, R.E., Zhu, W., Reina, C. and Maroosis, J.A. (2010), “Virtue-based measurement of ethical
leadership: the leadership virtues questionnaire”, Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice
and Research, Vol. 62 No. 4, pp. 235-250.
 Sev, A. (2009), “How can the construction industry contribute to sustainable development? UK
A conceptual framework”, Sustainable Development, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 161-173.
construction
Tabassi, A.A. and Abu Bakar, A.H. (2010), “Towards assessing the leadership style and quality
of transformational leadership: the case of construction firms of Iran”, Journal of
industry
Technology Management in China, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 245-258.
Taylor, A., Cocklin, C., Brown, R. and Wilson-Evered, E. (2011), “An investigation of champion-
driven leadership processes”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 412-433. 201
Taylor, A. (2008), “Promoting sustainable practices: the importance of building leadership
capacity”, Proceedings of the Enviro 08 Conference, 5-7 May, Melbourne, Victoria.
Toor, S.R. and Ofori, G. (2008), “Leadership for future construction industry: agenda for authentic
leadership”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 620-630.
Downloaded by LONDON SOUTH BANK UNIVERSITY At 09:13 01 May 2015 (PT)

Toor, S.R. and Ofori, G. (2008b), “Grounded theory as an appropriate methodology for leadership
research in construction”, in Haig, R. and Amaratunga, D. (Eds), Proceedings of the CIB
International Conference on Building Education and Research: Building Resilience,
Kandalama, Sri Lanka, 11-15 February, pp. 1816-1831.
Toor, S.R. and Ofori, G. (2006), “An antecedental model of leadership development”,
In Proceedings of joint international symposium of CIB working commissions W55/W65/
W86, Rome, Italy, October.
Vecchio, R.P. (2002), “Preferences for idealised styles of supervision”, The Leadership Quarterly,
Vol. 13 No. 6, pp. 643-671.
Yang, R.-L., Huang, C.-F. and Kun-Shan Wu, K.-S. (2011), “The association among project
manager’s leadership style, teamwork and project success”, International Journal of Project
Management, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 258-267.
Yin, R.K. (2003), Applications of Case Study Research, SAGE Publications, London.
Yukl, G. (1998), Leadership in Organizations, 4th ed., Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
Yukl, G. (2006), Leadership in Organizations, Elsevier, New York, NY.
Zaccaro, S.J. (1996), Models and Theories of Leadership, US Army Research Institute for the
Behavioural and Social Sciences, Alexandria, VA.
Zhu, W., Riggio, R.E., Avolio, B.J. and Sosik, J.J. (2011), “The effect of leadership on follower moral
identity: does transformational/transactional style make a difference?”, Journal of
Leadership and Organizational Studies, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 150-163.

About the authors

Dr Alex Opoku is a Senior Lecturer in Quantity Surveying at the Department of Built
Environment, London South Bank University. Dr Alex Opoku is the corresponding author and
can be contacted at: opokua@lsbu.ac.uk
Vian Ahmed is a Professor in the Built Environment, Director of Postgraduate Research
Studies at the School of the Built Environment, University of Salford.
Dr Heather Cruickshank is a University Lecturer at the Centre for sustainable Development,
University of Cambridge.

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

View publication stats